I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today! (Archived)

roadburner

The 1970 Camaro RS was the best looking ponycar ever made. Just beautiful. The moronic Federal bumper regulations made the F Bodies look bloated.

berri

1970 was a good styling year to me for most of the pony cars, but the Camaro was quite nice looking. Was that Camaro actually called a 70.5? I can't remember, but I believe they came out late, but maybe it was early - whichever, I don't think it was released with most of the other 70's. For 70, I find Camaro versus Challenger a very tough call; both seemed very nicely done. I liked the 69 Mustang better than the 70, but I think most go with the 70 because of available power platforms?

stickguy

I would love a 70 or 71 Camaro SS 350, 4 speed. front and rear spoilers and split front bumper. sunoco blue or dark green with double white stripes.

uplanderguy

The new Camaro and revised Corvette came out in Feb. '70.

I always thought if you bought a new Camaro or 'Vette in fall or early winter '69, you probably were considered as having a '69 at trade-in time, even if you bought one built in the fall of '69 and considered it a '70 when you bought it.

I like the new taillights and wrapround rear window of the '75 Camaro. The bumpers didn't even bother me. I like the early wraparound instrument panel better than the one above too, although every magazine review commented negatively on the visibility of the gauges, most likely corrected in the later upper panel shown above.

fintail

Something obscure spotted on the road early this morning (dashcam capture, hard to get in a screenshot):

berri

70 Camaro or 70 Challenger - both really sharp looking cars. IIRC, Firebirds hit their stride in the second half of the 70's.
Fin, that's a tough one. Can't get a clear enough shot. In side profile it almost looks GM, but the back could be a Ford or Merc maybe. The convertible roof looks kind of Fomoco or Mopar. If it was in a highway motion shot I could rule GM in if the top kind of bloated up. In the old days Ford and Mopar convertible tops seemed more taut on the highway.

fintail

I think it's a 62 Pontiac, maybe on 8 lug wheels. It was darker out than the pic suggests, but I noticed the windows were down, which explains the top.

Michaell

Saw this at breakfast this morning

imidazol97

.

Catalina convertible. '62 or maybe 61.

Mr_Shiftright

Why are 95% of all Porsche 914s so tired looking? Poor thing. I like those cars, used to own one.

Michaell

Mr_Shiftright said:

Why are 95% of all Porsche 914s so tired looking? Poor thing. I like those cars, used to own one.

This one was a 2.0 (at least, that's what the badge on the back stated).

And, I agree - even the ones I saw 25 years ago when I lived in SoCal just weren't cared for all that well.

stickguy

45 years old, not worth that much, and still super expensive to maintain?

fintail

When I was a little kid, a friend of the family had a 914. It kind of amused me that she was a middle aged woman, and not small - she must have been at least 5'10", and although not huge, wasn't skinny either, but liked having a small sporty car, and somehow fit in the little thing. I remember she moved on from it around 1985 and got a new Alfa Spider, which she also crammed herself into on sunny days for several years. The Alfa went in the 90s as I think it was finally becoming a pain, but she couldn't keep away from some kind of roadster, as she got a R129 SL sometime in the early 2000s. Her daily driver for most of these years was a pretty blue ~80 Eldo.

uplanderguy

That Pontiac is a '62 Bonneville convertible.

capriracer

Mr_Shiftright said:

Why are 95% of all Porsche 914s so tired looking? Poor thing. I like those cars, used to own one.

I think 914's were about the go, rather than the show. They were boring looking back then, and haven't gotten any better looking over the years.

Mr_Shiftright

stickguy said:

45 years old, not worth that much, and still super expensive to maintain?

You get VW performance at Porsche prices!

PF_Flyer

Was a Monday to relax with a movie

imidazol97

1963 Impala. Beautiful and a beautiful color.

explorerx4

I'm goingto take a wild guess. Goodfellas?

ab348

Oh yeah, I guess there is an Impala, a Buick and a Cadillac in that shot. But that '66 Chrysler convertible is what my eye was drawn to.

berri

I wonder if the Buick is a Wildcat?

uplanderguy

I'd say that is a Wildcat as it appears to have "Wildcat" written across the back...too many letters for "Buick", anyway.

Anybody going to Hershey this week? I'm leaving today, staying with a friend in his motorhome. Either at the swap meet, or the show Saturday, if you see a bright blue windbreaker with red and white "Ohio Region Studebaker Drivers' Club" lettering on the back, it'll be me. Stop and say 'hi'!

PF_Flyer

explorerx4 said:

I'm goingto take a wild guess. Goodfellas?

Don't buy wigs that come off at the wrong time.

PF_Flyer

ab348 said:

Oh yeah, I guess there is an Impala, a Buick and a Cadillac in that shot. But that '66 Chrysler convertible is what my eye was drawn to.

Yea, my '66 Newport was a dark green four door. It would have been WAY cool to have had that convertible, but I'm not so sure Mom would have thought it was the right car to drive the kids around in

andre1969

I just stumbled across a ghost from the past. For a few months back in 1999, I had a '67 Chrysler Newport hardtop coupe. It had belonged to the grandmother of a friend of mine, and when she passed away, the family gave it to me, just to get it away from the house so they could settle the estate. Well, today I was looking through some old real estate sales online, and found the old listing for that house. Look what's photobombing it...

PF_Flyer

uplanderguy said:

I'd say that is a Wildcat as it appears to have "Wildcat" written across the back...too many letters for "Buick", anyway.

Anybody going to Hershey this week? I'm leaving today, staying with a friend in his motorhome. Either at the swap meet, or the show Saturday, if you see a bright blue windbreaker with red and white "Ohio Region Studebaker Drivers' Club" lettering on the back, it'll be me. Stop and say 'hi'!

If you're taking the northern route across I-80, you'll be going right past me in State College

xwesx

andre1969 said:

I just stumbled across a ghost from the past. For a few months back in 1999, I had a '67 Chrysler Newport hardtop coupe. It had belonged to the grandmother of a friend of mine, and when she passed away, the family gave it to me, just to get it away from the house so they could settle the estate. Well, today I was looking through some old real estate sales online, and found the old listing for that house. Look what's photobombing it...

Only had it for a few months? That seems unusual for you, Andre! What happened to it?

fintail

The car hoarder who lived in my neighborhood several years ago had a Chrysler like that. I once caught a snap of the car in action:

ab348

I like those "fast top" Chryslers. Apparently stamping those huge rear quarter panels without rippling the metal was a nightmare in the metal press shops.

uplanderguy

That yellow one's a Three Hundred! Very nice.

PF, starting from my friend's place in Indiana, PA so we'll be taking the turnpike.

I went to college at Clarion, which is right on 80 in PA.

andre1969

Well, in November of 1999, I bought my 2000 Intrepid. My uncle lent me the $2000 for the down payment. However, at that time, I still owed him $2000, for an '88 LeBaron turbo coupe that I bought from him when I was married. I went through a bad divorce, and it took awhile to dig out of that. Also, around that time, the brakes on that '67 Newport failed, and it needed a lot of other work. So, I sold it, and used the proceeds to start paying my uncle back.

It had a 383-2bbl, torqueflite, and a/c, which still worked. The interior was pretty ratty, and it had rust coming out here and there. Passenger side door wouldn't open. One thing that car proved though, in my opinion at least, how un-necessary power brakes really were on a drum brake car. Not only did I have no trouble stopping it (well, when it had functioning brakes at least), but my friend's petite little grandmother, who had the car since she bought it used in 1971, never had any trouble with it.

Oh, as far as Hershey goes, Grbeck, Lemko, and I are planning on being there to see the antique cars on Saturday.

PF_Flyer

uplanderguy said:

That yellow one's a Three Hundred! Very nice.

PF, starting from my friend's place in Indiana, PA so we'll be taking the turnpike.

I went to college at Clarion, which is right on 80 in PA.

Well if you're ever swinging through Happy Valley, be sure to let me know and we can visit

PF_Flyer

andre1969 said:

Well, in November of 1999, I bought my 2000 Intrepid. My uncle lent me the $2000 for the down payment. However, at that time, I still owed him $2000, for an '88 LeBaron turbo coupe that I bought from him when I was married. I went through a bad divorce, and it took awhile to dig out of that. Also, around that time, the brakes on that '67 Newport failed, and it needed a lot of other work. So, I sold it, and used the proceeds to start paying my uncle back.

It had a 383-2bbl, torqueflite, and a/c, which still worked. The interior was pretty ratty, and it had rust coming out here and there. Passenger side door wouldn't open. One thing that car proved though, in my opinion at least, how un-necessary power brakes really were on a drum brake car. Not only did I have no trouble stopping it (well, when it had functioning brakes at least), but my friend's petite little grandmother, who had the car since she bought it used in 1971, never had any trouble with it.

Oh, as far as Hershey goes, Grbeck, Lemko, and I are planning on being there to see the antique cars on Saturday.

I met Lemko at the Philly Auto Show! Saturday is PSU homecoming so avoiding that US 322 corridor on Sat is high on my list!

berri

While I like that gen Chrysler, the 2 dr coupe not so much. I'm not really a fan of reversed C pillars, but the main thing is that I think the greenhouse on the coupe is too short looking for the rest of the body, or maybe it is that the roof line makes the rest of the car look like a barge. I think that coupe roof line only lasted a couple of years.

andre1969

berri said:

While I like that gen Chrysler, the 2 dr coupe not so much. I'm not really a fan of reversed C pillars, but the main thing is that I think the greenhouse on the coupe is too short looking for the rest of the body, or maybe it is that the roof line makes the rest of the car look like a barge. I think that coupe roof line only lasted a couple of years.

I like the '65-66 C-body Mopars, but wasn't so crazy about the '67-68 restyle. They seemed like they got more bulky and massive, and I just didn't like a lot of the styling details. Dodge and Plymouth also offered that reverse-slant C-pillar on the Polara/Monaco and the Fury. Plymouth, however, still offered the option of getting the older hardtop roofline, with the large triangular quarter windows. I'm not sure if it carried over unchanged from '65-66, or if it just bore a resemblance. I prefer that roofline, actually, but even here, the Plymouth seemed like it bulked up enough that the roofline didn't seem proportionate with the rest of the car.

I think the 4-doors, both pillared and hardtop, looked good, and the convertibles as well, but I just never cared too much for that reverse-slant C-pillar. It made me think of the '67-69 Barracuda, but not as well-done.

As for those reverse-slant C-pillars, I do like them if they're used with a wraparound rear window. My Granddad's '53 DeSoto Firedome 4 door was like that, and I thought it looked really good. Or, what like Nash/Rambler did for awhile, or a '58 Impala.

fintail

Saw a 2 door soft top RAV4 today - Toyota was still playful in the 90s. Now they just try hard.

ab348

andre1969 said:

I like the '65-66 C-body Mopars, but wasn't so crazy about the '67-68 restyle. They seemed like they got more bulky and massive, and I just didn't like a lot of the styling details.

The '65/'66 Chryslers were the pinnacle for them in that era. Just great-looking cars, really nice interiors, built like tanks too. I agree that the '67/'68 was a step backwards though certain models still looked good.

stickguy

am I the only guy here that really does not like big cars? Including from back in the old days. Even in the 70's, a Nova was much more interesting than an Impala.

Mr_Shiftright

Count me in. I never liked huge cars. I do, however, like huge trucks!

berri

I like a good land yacht for long Interstate drives

fintail

Depends on big - big like an E-class or big like a Fleetwood Talisman? Both have their merits.

If I lived in podunk, big is fine. If I live in Manhattan, I'll have to take a rain check on that Lincoln Mark IV.

stickguy

An E class is about the size of a sonata or accord. So IMO a large car, but manageable. A 1966 Chrysler or 73 impala, that’s Nimitz class. If I want something too big for parking lots or my garage, might as well get a Ram 4 door!

ab348

Well, that's what most pickup trucks are sold to be today, not for work, but for a big cruiser.

Mr_Shiftright

berri said:

I like a good land yacht for long Interstate drives

ab348 said:

Well, that's what most pickup trucks are sold to be today, not for work, but for a big cruiser.

If you don't get seasick driving them. Nothing more horrifying that quick lane changes or panic stops in a '76 Eldorado.

Modern large pickups handle surprisingly well, I must say.

xwesx

Mr_Shiftright said:

If you don't get seasick driving them. Nothing more horrifying that quick lane changes or panic stops in a '76 Eldorado.

Modern large pickups handle surprisingly well, I must say.

They sure do! The NV3500 I helped drive back to Alaska last week was impressively well-planted on the road. We were in that thing for 52 hours straight, and I suffered very little fatigue from being in it that long. It rode very well, which actually says a lot for a one-ton rig. My '69 C20 jostles me more on a ten-mile run to town than the NV3500 did all the way home.

andre1969

For me, it's the comfort. Usually, but not always, a bigger car is going to be roomier inside, with better legroom, more distance between the steering wheel and my chest, and better visibility because the B-pillars are further back, and the A-pillars are more off to the side, so they're not quite as much in my line of vision. A car with a longer wheelbase, and wider track, also tends to ride better, and feel less jittery.

Usually, I think a bigger car looks better, too, because the proportions are better. Now, if they get TOO long, they can look awkward, too. It may not be the case so much anymore, but back in the day, sometimes a big car would even handle better than a small one. Mainly, because big cars were the bread and butter of the auto industry, they put more effort into them. And, they became such masters at making them, they could deliver them at a reasonable price. As a result, with smaller cars, they really couldn't make them any less expensive, and maintain the same quality as the bigger cars, so they'd find ways to cheap out on them. And back in the day, few people would pay the same price for a small car as they would a big one, so the cost cutting was almost essential.

Oh, one item of interest, when it comes to pickups. On the day I bought my 2012 Ram, I mentioned that I thought it rode rough. My uncle responded, that's because you're used to a Chevy. I don't know if it's always been a tradition that Dodges ride rougher than GM products, but in this case, the Chevy I was used to was my Granddad's '85 Silverado! In most driving situations, that Silverado did seem like it rode smoother. However, with a serious enough bump, the rear axle would hop harshly enough that if you had back or neck issues, you'd be done for the day! Oddly, that Silverado did better in the snow, too. They're both just RWD, but you'd think the Ram, with Suregrip, ABS, and traction control, would do better. However, the Ram would spin out too easily with the traction control off, and with it on, it would cut the power to the point you couldn't dig in and get any traction. The Silverado, meanwhile, would usually just dig in and get moving. And, when the snow plows buried the entrance to the driveway, I'd just bash through it with the Silverado. I imagine the Ram would leave its bumper fascia if I tried that.

stickguy

probably the different tires on it.

berri

A lot of cars these days come with low rolling resistance tires for fuel economy, but the trade off is often traction in bad conditions.

fintail

I've cut my cable back to a basic package, but now and then will flip through the remaining channels rather than spend time finding something streaming. Apparently there's a channel running CHiPs episodes every night, and it is a goldmine for car spotting. Last night started with an LTD II driven by Broderick Crawford:

- Apparently Ford sponsored the show, at least early on, so there are tons of late model FML products on the road.

- Then a scene with a Citroen driving on 3 wheels, with Ponch and John not getting it.

- then maybe the best/worst, a scene with an older woman in a 61 Buick 2 door HT trying to push start another older woman's 67-68 Galaxie - by rear ending it at about 20-25mph. It wasn't pretty, but that was just an unwanted used car then:


A couple days ago I saw a snippet where a 450SL wouldn't start, because it was "flooded" (these were FI cars of course, and the malaise era systems could have driveability quirks, but this was a new car):



And a scene where a 64 Chrysler is being towed, breaks loose, and rolls:

ab348

CHiPs was a show I wanted to like, but I could never get past the scenes where they were supposed to be driving side by side on the Interstate, but it was obvious they were actually doing about 15mph.